The Biggest Market Call of the Decade

Yes, I’m about to give props to Goldman.  Deal with it.

The single biggest, most profitable market call of the last decade was made in 2001 by economist Jim O’Neill, then working at none other than Goldman Sachs.  The call was made in Global Economics Paper #66 aka “Building Better Global Economic BRICs” and it marked the original usage of the term “BRIC” to describe Brazil, Russia, India and China as a group.

The coining of the term is secondary to the trillions in wealth and world-changing shifts that this paper predicted.  Had you heeded O’Neill’s work and gotten invested in the stock markets of those four nations, you’d have made more money this past decade than by doing virtually anything else conceivable.

from Goldman Sachs Global Economics Research

from Goldman Sachs Global Economics Research

O’Neill and his fellow researchers concluded way ahead of everyone else that:

  • Over the next 50 years, Brazil, Russia, India and China—the BRICs economies — could become a much larger force in the world economy. Using the latest demographic projections and a model of capital accumulation and productivity growth, we map out GDP growth, income per capita and currency movements in the BRICs economies until 2050.
  • The results are startling.  If things go right, in less than 40 years, the BRICs economies together could be larger than the G6 in US dollar terms.  By 2025 they could account for over half the size of the G6.  Currently they are worth less than 15%. Of the current G6, only the US and Japan may be among the six largest economies in US dollar terms in 2050.

This call was bigger and more prescient than any I can think of this decade.  It literally encompasses every major theme, from currencies to commodities, from the cost of technology components to the price of a barrel of oil, from the exchange rate of the dollar to the growth rate of the global middle class.

As far as percentage gains, in some instances, we’re talking about thousands of percentage points in whole indices!

Congratulations to Goldman Sachs for nailing this story back in 2001 and to anyone who got in and rode the BRIC trade this decade.  From where these markets stand today, even after the Credit Crisis, O’Neill’s original paper is starting to look like a once-in-a-lifetime call.

Here’s how right GS was, a look at each of the BRIC markets since 2001:

India and China markets since 2001

India and China markets since 2001

Russia and Brazil since 2001

Russia and Brazil since 2001

Sources:

Unfortunately, I have been unable to locate the actual Paper #66, but here’s a link to Goldman Sachs’ BRIC Research Archives, which seems to go back to 2003:

http://www2.goldmansachs.com/ideas/brics/index.html

Read Also:

Emerging Idol: Auditions for BRIC without the “R” (TRB)

Full Disclosure:  Nothing on this site should ever be construed as research, advice or an invitation to buy or sell any securities, please see my Terms & Conditions page for a full disclaimer.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here: https://www.ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. Contrahour commented on Dec 01

    Wow! You gotta give credit where credit is due. GS owns us because they are good and smart.

  2. Contrahour commented on Dec 01

    Wow! You gotta give credit where credit is due. GS owns us because they are good and smart.

  3. tom brakke commented on Dec 01

    An apt shout out for the creation of a theme and meme that has become pervasive. It is instructive to trace the evolution of these intellectual constructs and give credit where it is due.

    The next step will be determining when the concept is beyond its useful life and is causing decision errors as a result.

  4. tom brakke commented on Dec 01

    An apt shout out for the creation of a theme and meme that has become pervasive. It is instructive to trace the evolution of these intellectual constructs and give credit where it is due.

    The next step will be determining when the concept is beyond its useful life and is causing decision errors as a result.

  5. jj commented on Dec 04

    Shouldn’t be that much of a surprise

    3 billion people vs. 300 million population

  6. jj commented on Dec 04

    Shouldn’t be that much of a surprise

    3 billion people vs. 300 million population